Most stable unattended FAH platform

[RPhArrow]

Question for you big borgers/farmers out there -- What OS platform gives you the least amount of problems in keeping a fold on when you only have limited access to the boxen?

I really like Kubuntu for boxes that I can get to with a KVM switch because I can set up wine & run the better producing windows FAH client, and I've recently had success using putty to control them too.

I've tried several linux OS's for headless boxen, and had trouble setting up simple SSH or samba access unless I use unhappy_mage's foldix .. Foldix is perfect for any box that you have physical access to setup one time, then need to place elsewhere. As long as the box restarts, foldix will recover and restart your folding process without any help. If you can accept the output of the linux client , foldix is your best choice.

My problem is that I want the economy of a linux box , but one that will run headless with wine (to get me the QMD's), and still be as reliable as foldix.

I'm currently trying overclockix and struggling with it....

 

[frank b]

Not that I have a HUGE number of computers running but I think I've had the best luck with Windows 2000. I have a computer with only a power and network cable attached and it's been going for almost a year without any problem. Although it doesn't have anything else on it just the F@H program.

2x Windows XP
2x Windows 2000
1x Fedora Core 4

 

[marty9876]

I've been curious on how Windows NT would do.

As long as you leave NT alone, it can be a very stable OS. No remote desktop or what not, need to use VNC. I assume the latest FAH client would run.

Offically NT is no longer supported by Microsoft for security patches and alike. Keep behind a NAT device and all should be good.

 

[slebidia]

I think any folding machine that's only purpose is folding will be stable. I'm running Windows 2000, Server 2003, XP, Foldix, Fedora and Suse at home and none of them randomly crash.

 

[drdeutsch]

Umm..... so the WinFAH.exe program produces better than the normal FAH504-linux.exe program?

I guess I don't get it. Same processor and RAM... why would the program get you better results?

 

[OSUguy98]

some WUs only get assigned to windows boxen... with the point bonuses,etc the way they are, most of the time, running the windows console will yeild a higher ppd than a linux box running the linux console


Keep on Folding!! For the [H]orde!!

 

[unhappy_mage]

My problem is that I want the economy of a linux box , but one that will run headless with wine (to get me the QMD's), and still be as reliable as foldix.

Aww, <3....

I'll be reviving my working on Foldix (but more fold-server) in the spring; maybe I can get Wine in there somewhere. It's on my todo list (which is several pages long at this point ).

 

[SpoogeMonkey]

WindowsME FTW!!

J/K

I remember when my bro-in-law gave me his "broken" 1ghz tbird, asus mb and server tower case cuz they didn't work. A little mobo/bios tweaking, 400mhz oc and a fresh install of w2k pro was the most stable platform I had ever used at that time (just having switched from 4 horrid months of ME ).

 

[RPhArrow]

Aww, <3....

I'll be reviving my working on Foldix (but more fold-server) in the spring; maybe I can get Wine in there somewhere. It's on my todo list (which is several pages long at this point ).

No sweat mage !
I know you have tons on your plate I wasn't meaning to hound you, only to comment that foldix is the cleanest, smallest, easiest to understand, distro to set up on a minimal box. The only thing it lacks in my (small) mind is the ability to run the FAH windows console version. You have helped me immeasurably in my folding efforts, so if & when you decide to try putting Wine in (or any other experiment), I will promise a box to test/experiment/kill the aussies/ with !!